2013 IANA Functions Customer Service Survey Results
|
|
- Hope Lynch
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 2013 IANA Functions Customer Service Survey Results Survey by Ebiquity Report by Leo Vegoda Please see Errata attached at the end of this document. Revised Version effective March IANA Functions Customer Service/Survey Results/ Corrected Version 2015
2 Table of Contents Survey objective... 1 Executive Summary... 1 Methodology... 3 General Input... 4 Customer Complaint Resolution... 6 Open Ended Responses... 8 Functional breakdown Protocol Parameter Requests Document Authors Current IESG Members Routine Root Zone Management cctld Delegations & Redelegations gtld Delegations & Redelegations Root Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC) Key Management Internet Number Resources Allocation Management I NT Domain Registrants Overall conclusions
3 Survey objective ICANN engaged in a series of consultations during 2012 and 2013 to gather customer input on the Key Performance Indicators and targets it had developed for the IANA functions. ICANN publishes performance reports based on those standards. This survey is to measure customer satisfaction in 2013 and compare it with the 2012 results. Executive Summary In this report, results are presented as percentages. When a result includes a fraction it is rounded down for fractions below one half and up for those above one half. ICANN first conducted a survey of IANA functions customers in The survey was conducted by ICANN, with invitation sent to about 1,000 customers. The response rate was about 20 percent. In 2013, ICANN surveyed almost 1,500 customers in a survey conducted by an independent third-party organization. The response rate was about eight percent. In 2012, in an unsegmented survey, ICANN achieved greater than 80 percent customer satisfaction in all aspects of its delivery of the IANA functions, as the chart below shows reported satisfaction levels As in 2012, ICANN asked a question about general satisfaction with its performance of the IANA functions in In 2013 the level of satisfaction indicated by respondents who answered this general question was similar to that shown in However, the indicated levels of satisfaction reported by those who answered the new service specific questions were higher than the levels of satisfaction reported in response to the general question. Additional research is required to investigate the mismatch between these satisfaction levels. Responses to per-function questions show that ICANN has very high levels of customer satisfaction for each of the services for which responses were received. Similarly, responses to questions about the service aspects, such as courtesy, timeliness and accuracy, also showed very high levels of satisfaction. 1
4 As in 2012, the 2013 results indicate that the area with which there is the least satisfaction is timeliness. There were small deviations in the levels of satisfaction reported in 2013, with slightly increased levels of satisfaction for timeliness and slightly lower levels of satisfaction for documentation quality. The levels of satisfaction indicated for accuracy and courtesy remained consistent. The small changes seen are within the margin of measurement error and might not indicate a significant change in customer perception. The other area in which customers clearly see a need for improvement is reporting. As new performance standards reports for several IANA functions were published during the period in which the survey was conducted, it is possible that this is an area in which customers will perceive an improvement in the 2014 survey. 2 - Satisfaction breakdown by group The aggregated satisfaction figures are a simple average of the results for each of the functions in which a question was asked about that service aspect. No answers were received from two customer groups: RFC authors and requesters of delegation or redelegations. The very high level of satisfaction with the accuracy of the registries ICANN maintains in performing the IANA functions and the courtesy shown to customers are consistent across all customer groups. 2
5 3 - Satisfaction breakdown by Key Performance Indicator There is still a significant number of survey respondents who would like a faster level of service. ICANN will need to analyze where delays are occurring and identify how, if possible, those aspects of the service can be streamlined. The open ended responses provided a range of suggestions for ways to improve the request forms on ICANN s IANA website and also suggested that a review of the current web forms should be conducted. They also indicated that some request types would benefit from new forms and that other forms could benefit from reviews and improvements so that the customer requirements are more clearly spelled out and the forms make it easier to collect all the required information. Methodology ICANN engaged Ebiquity ( a global media, marketing, and reputation consultancy, with over 20 years of experience in customer and stakeholder research, as an independent third-party organization to conduct its second annual customer satisfaction survey. In contrast to 2012, this survey was segmented by customer group while still allowing customer anonymity. Customers were associated with each of the services they had made use of in the previous 12 months and asked the general questions about their perception of ICANN s performance of the IANA functions as well as group specific questions. No prizes, awards, payment or remuneration of any kind were offered or provided to respondents to the survey. 3
6 General Input Survey invitations were sent to customers who had used the following service areas in the previous 12 months: Internet Engineering Steering Group members Registrants of.int domains Requesters of Assignments in Protocol Parameter Registries Authors of technical standards and documentation published as RFCs Regional Internet Registries requesting number resource allocations TLD operators requesting routine root zone change requests TLD operators requesting delegations or redelegations Trusted Community Representatives (TCRs) involved in Root DNSSEC KSK ceremonies or activities Invitations sent 1491 Response count 112 Response rate 8% Overall satisfaction rate 83% Overall explicit satisfaction average 90% The overall satisfaction rate is calculated as a simple average of the respondents who were satisfied or very satisfied. The overall explicit satisfaction average is a simple average that ignores the Not applicable/do not use answers and so is slightly higher. 4
7 4 - General satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators The first question asked participants to rate the relative importance of the seven aspects identified in the performance standards consultations in the delivery of the IANA functions. Participants in 2013 again indicated that accuracy is the most important aspect of the service with timeliness and process quality following closely behind. Courtesy and reporting are identified as the least important aspects of the service to the survey participants. 5 - Relative importance of Key Performance Indicators 5
8 When asked to compare ICANN s delivery of the IANA functions with the performance they experience form other suppliers of registration services, 82 percent of respondents rated ICANN as excellent or good. 6 - ICANN's performance compared with other suppliers of registration services 6
9 Customer Complaint Resolution Of the 112 respondents who participated in the survey, 51 percent were aware that ICANN has a Customer Complaint Resolution Process and 11 percent had experienced customer service problems in the past year, of those, 58 percent were satisfied with the resolution. Ninety-four percent of respondents indicated that they would be happy to approach ICANN about an IANA function related customer service issue they needed to resolve. 7 - Experience of customer service issues 7
10 8 - Awareness of CSCRP 9 - Satisfaction with resolution of customer service issues 8
11 10 - Comfort in approaching ICANN over customer service issues 9
12 Open Ended Responses ICANN received 19 open ended responses in the general portion of the survey. The responses focused on the web interface to the Root Zone Management system and the Root Zone Database published on ICANN s IANA website, information and web forms on ICANN s IANA website, features of Protocol Parameter registries, and the quality of the processes and execution of processes for Protocol Parameter registration requests. Comments included several requests to improve the user interfaces in the Root Zone Management system and other web forms used for requesting registrations. There were two statements related to dissatisfaction with how particular protocol parameter registration requests were handled. Two respondents believed that IANA is an independent organization and not a set of functions performed by ICANN. Comments in two responses related to the execution of the survey itself. There were seven neutral and positive comments, 11 negative comments and eight requests for feature or process changes. As some responses contained multiple statements or questions, there were a total of 27 elements to the open ended responses. ICANN staff will review the issues and suggestions raised in these comments so that appropriate improvement work can be appropriately prioritized IANA Functions Customer Service/Survey Results/Final/Corrected Version
13 Functional breakdown For each of the IANA functions, the customer using the service was asked questions based around the Key Performance Indicators for that service. Requesters of Assignments in Protocol Parameter Registries Survey invitations were sent to the registered address for people or organizations who had requested a new protocol parameter registration or modification to a protocol parameter registration in a wide selection of registries between October 2012 and September The bulk of the registrations occurred in these five registries: MIME Media Types IPv4 and IPv6 Multicast Addresses Private Enterprise Numbers (PEN) Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number TRIP IP Telephony Administrative Domain (ITAD) Numbers As the number of PEN and Ports requesters is orders of magnitude larger than all other groups in the survey, a random selection of both these groups was used to make sure that the focus on these two registries did not overwhelm the rest of the results. Invitations sent 884 Response count 57 Response rate 6% Overall satisfaction rate 93% Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average +3% 11
14 12 - Ease of submitting requests 11 - Protocol Parameter requesters satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators These results show a higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. Without further research it is not possible to state with any certainty what the reason for this is. 12
15 What is clear, though is that about a sixth of respondents would like protocol parameter requests to be processed more quickly. Authors of technical standards and documentation published as RFCs Survey invitations and reminders were sent to the authors address for RFCs that were published October 2012 and September Invitations sent 161 Response count 0 Response rate 0% Overall satisfaction rate Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average Cannot be calculated Cannot be calculated Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) members Survey invitations were sent to all non-icann members of the IESG. Invitations sent 19 Response count 3 Response rate 16% Overall satisfaction rate 92% Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average +2% 13
16 13 - IESG membrs' satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators These results show a higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. Without further research it is not possible to state with any certainty what the reason for this is. A third of the respondents indicated some dissatisfaction with the published performance reports. Notably, this was a single individual as only three IESG members responded. Every year, ICANN reviews the supplemental agreement, which forms a service level agreement and statement of work, it has with the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee. ICANN will raise the issue of reporting with the committee to identify any specific deficiencies and work towards remedying them. TLD operators requesting routine root zone change requests Survey invitations were sent to the administrative and technical contacts for all TLDs where routine changes had been executed between October 2012 and September Routine changes are classed as all changes except for a delegation or redelegation. Invitations sent 295 Response count 34 Response rate 12% Overall satisfaction rate 93% 14
17 Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average +3% 14 - Routine RZM change web interface ease of use 15 - Routine RZM changes - satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators 15
18 On the whole, these results show a higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. Without further research it is not possible to state with any certainty what the reason for this is. The aspects of the service with the lowest levels of satisfaction are the timeliness with which requests are processed and information about the status of requests. Satisfaction with the timeliness with which routine root zone changes are processed is lower than the level of satisfaction with this aspect of the service as shown in the general section of the survey. cctld operators requesting delegations or redelegations Survey invitations and reminders were sent to the administrative and technical contacts for all cctlds that had completed a redelegation between October 2012 and September Invitations sent 17 Response count 0 Response rate 0% Overall satisfaction rate Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average Cannot be calculated Cannot be calculated gtld operators requesting delegations or redelegations While the methodology supports a series of questions on gtld delegations and redelegations, none took place during the October 2012 to September 2013 period, so no-one was invited to answer these questions. 16
19 Trusted Community Representatives involved in Root DNSSEC KSK ceremonies or activities Survey invitations were sent to the current cohort of Trusted Community Representatives who attend and validate Root DNS Key Signing Ceremonies. Invitations sent 33 Response count 6 Response rate 18% Overall satisfaction rate 100% Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average +10% 16 - TCRs' satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators This function shows a higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. This is likely to be related to the highly controlled, scripted and audited nature of the key management function. Regional Internet Registries requesting number resource allocations Survey invitations were sent to the CEO and Registration Services Managers for the five RIRs. Invitations sent 10 17
20 Response count 2 Response rate 20% Overall satisfaction rate 100% Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average +10% 17 - RIRs' satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators These results show a higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. 18
21 Registrants of.int domains Survey invitations were sent to the administrative and technical contacts for all.int domains where changes, including new delegations, had been executed between October 2012 and September A survey invitation was also sent to the NTIA Contracting Officer s Representative. Invitations sent 95 Response count 10 Response rate 11% Overall satisfaction rate 87% Deviation from overall explicit satisfaction average -3% 18 -.INT registrants satisfaction with Key Performance Indicators This is the customer group that expressed the lowest level overall level of satisfaction. Nonetheless, the results show an overall higher level of satisfaction than was recorded in the unsegmented 2012 survey and the general view recorded in the opening section of this survey. However, as with the responses relating to routine Root DNS Zone Management, the level of satisfaction with the timeliness is lower than for other services. Again, this is an area for investigation. Additional research is required to identify the reason for the lower level of satisfaction with the timeliness with which.int changes are processed. 19
22 Overall conclusions About one third fewer people were invited to ICANN s 2012 survey than the 2013 survey. Despite that, the 2013 survey had fewer absolute responses and the proportion of responses dropped to just eight percent. The customer segmentation employed in the methodology allowed us to see that there were two segments where none of the invited customers participated. Based on feedback sent to ICANN staff during the survey and provided in the open comment field, ICANN plans to make some improvements to the sending of invitations and hosting of survey web pages in These include: The independent third-party organization managing the execution of the survey on ICANN s behalf will be required to use the same domain name for corporate communication and site hosting, for sending invitations and reminders, and for hosting the survey web pages. The survey must be accessible over HTTPS and the certificate securing the connection must be issued to the organization managing the survey by a reliable CA. Where customer groups can be alerted on community mailing lists, ICANN will pre-announce the survey and the name of the third-party organization managing its execution using them. The survey invitations and reminders will include a URL for a page on ICANN s site, confirming the survey details. Per-service satisfaction levels have now been measured by segmenting the questions in addition to questions measuring overall perception. In general, customers seem to indicate greater satisfaction with the services they use than when answering similar but more general questions. The one exception to this trend seems to be the level of timeliness associated with routine changes to root DNS zone data for TLDs and changes made for.int registrants. The service area with the second lowest level of satisfaction was reporting. ICANN introduced a new set of reports in October 2013, that reflect its performance against the performance standards agreed with customer groups, just as the survey was launched. As these reports were new at the time of the survey and customers have had little opportunity to review and analyze the reports, we hope that this aspect of the service will see increased satisfaction in A number of useful suggestions for improvements to the user interface to the Root Zone Management system, other application forms and some Protocol Parameter registries were made. Each of these suggestions will be reviewed by ICANN s IANA department 20
23 and the suggestions will be factored into enhancements to our processes and procedures. 21
24 ERRATA SHEET In December 2013, the Customer Service Survey report was posted and it had a typographical error. That error resulted in incorrect calculations throughout the report. Below are the revisions to the incorrect numbers of the originally posted report. 1 Page Paragraph Corrections 4 Table Line 4 Changed 73% to 83% 4 Table Line 5 Changed 78% to 90% 11 Table Line 5 Changed +15% to +3% 13 Table 2, Line 5 Changed +14% to +2% 14 Table, Line 5 Changed +15% to +3% 17 Table, Line 5 Changed +22% to +10% 18 Table, Line 4 Changed +22% to +10% 19 Table, Line 5 Changed +9% to -3% The first error on Page 4 was of typographical nature. The second error on page 4 was due to an incorrect calculation of the average overall explicit satisfaction rating, which was based on Figure 4 on Page 5. The errors that follow are due to the correction of this number. Date: 16 March Note that the incorrect data identified in this errata sheet was not used in reporting results of the 2014 IANA Department Customer Service Survey, published on 17 December
2014 IANA FUNCTIONS CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY RESULTS. Survey by Ebiquity Report by Leo Vegoda & Marilia Hirano
2014 IANA FUNCTIONS CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY RESULTS Survey by Ebiquity Report by Leo Vegoda & Marilia Hirano November 2014 Table of Contents Survey objective 1 Executive summary 2 Methodology 4 General
More information2015 IANA Functions Customer Service Survey Results
2015 IANA Functions Customer Service Survey Results Report on the third annual customer service satisfaction survey administered by Ebiquity Marilia Hirano November 2015 Contents Survey objective... 3
More informationThe IANA Functions. An Introduction to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions
The IANA Functions An Introduction to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions Contents SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 4 SECTION 2: POLICY, STAKEHOLDERS AND STEWARDSHIP IMPLEMENTATION 6 SECTION
More informationIANA Functions to cctlds Sofia, Bulgaria September 2008
IANA Functions to cctlds Sofia, Bulgaria September 2008 Kim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers What is IANA? Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
More informationKim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
Introducing IANA Baltic Region and Eastern Europe International Seminar The Internet & the post-wsis environment: enhancing dialogue among the stakeholders Riga 2006 Kim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers
More informationResponse to Solicitation Number: SA-13-01-6R-P0-016
Response to Solicitation Number: SA-13-01-6R-P0-016 Offered by: Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA +1-310-823-9358 (tel) +1-310-823-8649
More informationInternet Structure and Organization
Internet Structure and Organization Resources management and allocation Bernard.Tuy@renater.fr Introduction What s the Internet? Why organizations / bodies are needed? Define protocol specifications Agree
More informationVerisign/ICANN Proposal in Response to NTIA Request
Verisign/ICANN Proposal in Response to NTIA Request Root Zone Administrator Proposal Related to the IANA Functions Stewardship Transition Introduction On March 14, 2014, NTIA announced its intent to transition
More informationComments to WGIG on Draft Working Papers Identifying Issues for Internet Governance. Submitted by APNIC http://www.apnic.net
Comments to WGIG on Draft Working Papers Identifying Issues for Internet Governance Submitted by APNIC http://www.apnic.net Contact: Paul Wilson, Director General Email: Do you have any
More information110207099 1099 01] RIN 0660 XA23:
Fiona M. Alexander Associate Administrator Office of International Affairs National Telecommunications and Information Administration 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room 4701 Washington, DC 20230 By electronic
More informationAn introduction to IANA Presentation Notes
An introduction to IANA Presentation Notes Date 29 September 2008 Contact Kim Davies, Manager of Root Zone Services kim.davies@icann.org While the Internet is renowned for being a worldwide network free
More informationInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Request for Comments: 6761. Category: Standards Track February 2013 ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Cheshire Request for Comments: 6761 M. Krochmal Updates: 1918, 2606 Apple Inc. Category: Standards Track February 2013 ISSN: 2070-1721 Abstract Special-Use Domain
More informationRoot zone update for TLD managers Mexico City, Mexico March 2009
Root zone update for TLD managers Mexico City, Mexico March 2009 Kim Davies Manager, Root Zone Services Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers A quick census 280 delegated 11 testing 280 delegated
More information3SECTION B SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS. This is a no cost, $0.00 time and material contract. B.2 COST/PRICE
3SECTION B SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS This is a no cost, $0.00 time and material contract. B.2 COST/PRICE The Contractor may not charge the United States Government to perform the requirements
More informationICANN STRATEGIC PLAN JULY 2012 JUNE 2015
ICANN STRATEGIC PLAN JULY 2012 JUNE 2015 One World. One Internet. One World. One Internet. ICANN is the global organization that coordinates the Internet s unique identifier systems for worldwide public
More informationThe Internet. On October 24, 1995, the FNC unanimously passed a resolution defining the term Internet.
The Internet Introductory material. An overview lecture that covers Internet related topics, including a definition of the Internet, an overview of its history and growth, and standardization and naming.
More informationThe Internet Introductory material.
The Internet Introductory material. An overview lecture that covers Internet related topics, including a definition of the Internet, an overview of its history and growth, and standardization and naming.
More informationInternet Bodies. Bernard.Tuy@renater.fr
Internet Bodies Bernard.Tuy@renater.fr Agenda Names, Acronyms in the Internet IETF organisation IESG, IAB, ISOC ICANN & IANA Standardisation process Standardisation compliance Internet Registries Requesting
More informationSummary - ENUM functions that maps telephone numbers to Internet based addresses - A description and the possible introduction to Sweden
DATE REFERENCE NO. 30 March 2001 01-9734 Summary - ENUM functions that maps telephone numbers to Internet based addresses - A description and the possible introduction to Sweden AUTHOR Joakim Strålmark
More informationText. Registry Onboarding and TLD Startup
Registry Onboarding and TLD Startup Background From Registry Onboarding to TLD Launch Registry Agreement Executed Delegation General Registration What is Onboarding? From Registry Onboarding to TLD Launch
More informationThe Internet Ecosystem and ICANN!! Steve Sheng @ Stanford University, Center for Information and Society! 29 April 2013!
The Internet Ecosystem and ICANN!! Steve Sheng @ Stanford University, Center for Information and Society! 29 April 2013! Ecosystem! + A network of interactions among organisms, and between organisms and
More informationGAO Engagement on the Internet Domain Name System Discussion Guide
GAO Engagement on the Internet Domain Name System Discussion Guide Background on GAO s Engagement GAO has been asked by the Chairs of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its Communications and
More informationRedelegation of Country Code Top Level Domains. February 2003
Note: This Paper was prepared by Miriam Sapiro of Summit Strategies International, LLC in May 2002 for the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT). CDT updated it in June 2002 to reflect the cctld Redelegation
More informationSSAC Report on the IANA Functions Contract
SSAC Report on the IANA Functions Contract A Report from the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) 10 October 2014 Preface This is a Report to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
More informationIANA Report on the Redelegation of the.fo Top Level Domain
IANA Report on the Redelegation of the.fo Top Level Domain Subject: Request of the FO Council for the.fo Top Level Domain Date: November 2004 The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (the IANA), as part
More informationBasic DNS Course. Module 1. DNS Theory. Ron Aitchison ZYTRAX, Inc. Page 1 of 24
Basic DNS Course Module 1 Ron Aitchison ZYTRAX, Inc. Page 1 of 24 The following are the slides used in this Module of the course. Some but not all slides have additional notes that you may find useful.
More informationYear End Results for FY10 Trimester Goals Color Key: T1 T2 T3
Preserve DNS Security and Stability Root Key Signing Key (KSK) - Implement production-level root signing of KSK processes Generic Signing Infrastructure - Implement generic signing infrastructure and sign
More informationICANN: achievements and challenges of a multi-stakeholder, bottom up, transparent model
ICANN: achievements and challenges of a multi-stakeholder, bottom up, transparent model Anne Rachel Inné, Giovanni Seppia Regional Liaisons Aurelio Peccei Lecture 4 April 2007 1 Presentation overview The
More informationFAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) Specific Questions about Afilias Managed DNS What is the Afilias DNS network? How long has Afilias been working within the DNS market? What are the names of the Afilias
More informationDNS Root NameServers
DNS Root NameServers An Overview Dr. Farid Farahmand Updated: 9/24/12 Who- is- Who! Over half million networks are connected to the Internet 5 billion users by 2015! Network numbers are managed by ICANN
More information[Letterhead of cctld]
[Letterhead of cctld] Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Suite 330, 4676 Admiralty Way Marina Del Rey, California 90292 USA [date] Dear Dr Twomey, This letter sets out our understanding
More informationRoot Zone KSK: The Road Ahead. Edward Lewis DNS-OARC & RIPE DNSWG May 2015 edward.lewis@icann.org
Root Zone KSK: The Road Ahead Edward Lewis DNS-OARC & RIPE DNSWG May 2015 edward.lewis@icann.org Agenda Setting the scene Change of Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) Roll (change) the Key Signing Key (KSK)
More informationChanges in IANA Service March 2006
Changes in IANA Service March 2006 CENTR General Assembly 29 London, UK Kim Davies kim.davies@icann.org Our Key Current Projects 1. Workflow Systems 2. Policy Review 3. Website Development 4. 24x7x365
More informationTHE MASTER LIST OF DNS TERMINOLOGY. v 2.0
THE MASTER LIST OF DNS TERMINOLOGY v 2.0 DNS can be hard to understand and if you re unfamiliar with the terminology, learning more about DNS can seem as daunting as learning a new language. To help people
More informationDraft WGIG Issue Paper on the Administration of Internet Names and IP Addresses
Draft WGIG Issue Paper on the Administration of Internet Names and IP Addresses This paper is a 'draft working paper' reflecting the preliminary findings of the drafting team. It has been subject to review
More information"Branding Strategies in light of the. Kevin G. Smith Sughrue Mion, PLLC Washington, D.C.
"Branding Strategies in light of the new Top Level Domains" What Brand Owners Can do to Protect Themselves and the Mechanism of the TMCH Kevin G. Smith Sughrue Mion, PLLC Washington, D.C. ksmith@sughrue.com
More informationSAC 049 SSAC Report on DNS Zone Risk Assessment and Management
SAC 049 SSAC Report on DNS Zone Risk Assessment and Management A Report from the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) 03 June 2011 SAC049 1 Preface This is a Report of the Security and
More informationIntroduction to IP Numbers vs. Domain names. Adiel A. Akplogan CEO, AFRINIC. 2014
Introduction to IP Numbers vs. Domain names Adiel A. Akplogan CEO, AFRINIC. 2014 Identifying an IP address Internet identifiers including information about how to reach a network location (via the Internet
More informationProposal to Transition the Stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions from the U.S. Commerce Department s National
Proposal to Transition the Stewardship of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions from the U.S. Commerce Department s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
More informationIETF Update on RDAP. ICANN52 Singapore CCTLD Tech Day. Marc Blanchet Viagénie marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca
IETF Update on RDAP ICANN52 Singapore CCTLD Tech Day Marc Blanchet Viagénie marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca February 9th 2015 From Whois to RDAP RDAP: Registration Data Access Protocol replacement of whois structured
More informationInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Category: Informational June 2010 ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Johnson Request for Comments: 5859 Cisco Systems, Inc. Category: Informational June 2010 ISSN: 2070-1721 Abstract TFTP Server Address Option for DHCPv4 This memo
More informationDNS Security Survey for National Computer Security Incident Response Teams December 2010
DNS Security Survey for National Computer Security Incident Response Teams December 2010 Summary As referenced during the ICANN meeting in Brussels, Belgium in June 2010, ICANN developed a survey on DNS
More informationDomain Names and their Role for the Net
Domain Names and their Role for the Net Hans Peter Dittler Karlsruhe 2000 H.P. Dittler - BRAINTEC Netzwerk-Consulting 27.6.2002 1 History 1962 first idea 1967 early planning for a real network 1969 ARPANET
More informationPLAN FOR ENHANCING INTERNET SECURITY, STABILITY, AND RESILIENCY
PLAN FOR ENHANCING INTERNET SECURITY, STABILITY, AND RESILIENCY June 2009 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 ICANN s Role... 2 ICANN Security, Stability and Resiliency Programs... 3 Plans to Enhance
More informationTestimony of. Hearing Entitled Should the Department of Commerce Relinquish Direct Oversight Over ICANN? April 10, 2014
Testimony of The Honorable Lawrence E. Strickling Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information National Telecommunications and Information Administration United States Department of Commerce
More informationNext Steps In Accelerating DNSSEC Deployment
Next Steps In Accelerating DNSSEC Deployment Dan York, CISSP Senior Content Strategist, Internet Society DNSSEC Deployment Workshop, ICANN 45 Toronto, Canada October 17, 2012 Internet Society Deploy360
More informationNew gtld Basics New Internet Extensions
New gtld Basics New Internet Extensions Agenda Overview about domain names, gtld timeline and the New gtld Program Why is ICANN doing this; potential impact of this initiative to businesses, governments,
More informationGlobal Registry Services Registrar Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for TLDs using Afilias Technology
Global Registry Services Registrar Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for TLDs using Afilias Technology Prepared by Afilias November 2013 Table of Contents Foreword... 1 Non-Technical... 1 Accreditation,
More informationDNSSEC - Why Network Operators Should Care And How To Accelerate Deployment
DNSSEC - Why Network Operators Should Care And How To Accelerate Deployment Dan York, CISSP Senior Content Strategist, Internet Society Eurasia Network Operators' Group (ENOG) 4 Moscow, Russia October
More informationCRISP Team Response to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) Call for Public Comment on IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal
CRISP Team Response to the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) Call for Public Comment on IANA Stewardship Transition Proposal Introduction The Consolidated RIR IANA Stewardship (CRISP)
More informationTHE DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY BRIEF VOLUME 11 ISSUE 1 APRIL 2014
THE DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY BRIEF VOLUME 11 ISSUE 1 APRIL 2014 THE VERISIGN DOMAIN REPORT AS THE GLOBAL LEADER IN DOMAIN NAMES, VERISIGN REVIEWS THE STATE OF THE DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY THROUGH A VARIETY OF
More informationDNS Cache Poisoning Vulnerability Explanation and Remedies Viareggio, Italy October 2008
DNS Cache Poisoning Vulnerability Explanation and Remedies Viareggio, Italy October 2008 Kim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers Agenda How do you
More informationComments on Docket Number 0810021307-81308-1, Enhancing the Security and Stability of the Internet s Domain Name and Addressing System
The Office of International Affairs National Telecommunications and Information Administration U.S. Department of Commerce Ms. Fiona Alexander Comments on Docket Number 0810021307-81308-1, Enhancing the
More informationRequest for Proposals for consulting services: Independent review of the ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO)
Request for Proposals for consulting services: Independent review of the ICANN Address Supporting Organization (ASO) Deadline for applications: 31-January-2011 ASO review ToR Page 1/10 1 Instructions to
More informationVanuatu Domain Name Management and Administration Regulation Inviting public comment and input
A Further Consultation Paper on Vanuatu Domain Name Management and Administration Regulation Inviting public comment and input 19 December 2014 1 Vanuatu Domain Name Management and Administration Regulation
More informationDOMAIN NAME SECURITY EXTENSIONS
DOMAIN NAME SECURITY EXTENSIONS The aim of this paper is to provide information with regards to the current status of Domain Name System (DNS) and its evolution into Domain Name System Security Extensions
More informationConsultation Paper on the Review on Administration of Internet Domain Names in Hong Kong
Consultation Paper on the Review on Administration of Internet Domain Names in Hong Kong Government Chief Information Officer Commerce, Industry and Technology Bureau The Government of the Hong Kong Special
More information2014 Information Technology Survey Results
2014 Information Technology Survey Results In our first annual IT Survey, we received 1,073 results and 2,162 comments. Below you will find a summary of the ratings we received. Respondents were asked
More informationUnderstanding Internet Focus Institutions [Session 6]
Understanding Internet Focus Institutions [Session 6] Theresa Swinehart General Manager, Global Partnerships ICANN ITU Workshop on Internet Governance Geneva, 26-27 February 2004 The Internet Arpa Network
More informationProtecting your trademarks online. FACTS & FAQs
Protecting your trademarks online FACTS & FAQs 2 TRADEMARK CLEARINGHOUSE 101 Protecting your trademarks online The launch of new web addresses, known as generic top level domain names (gtlds) will greatly
More information2008 DNS Cache Poisoning Vulnerability Cairo, Egypt November 2008
2008 DNS Cache Poisoning Vulnerability Cairo, Egypt November 2008 Kim Davies Manager, Root Zone Services Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers How does the DNS work? A typical DNS query The
More informationMonitoring the DNS. Gustavo Lozano Event Name XX XXXX 2015
Monitoring the DNS Gustavo Lozano Event Name XX XXXX 2015 Agenda 1 2 3 Components of the DNS Monitoring gtlds Monitoring other components of the DNS 4 5 Monitoring system Conclusion 2 Components of the
More informationTelecom and Internet Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities Names, Numbers, Internet Governance
Telecom and Internet Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities Names, Numbers, Internet Governance Global Forum ICT & The Future of Internet Bucharest, Romania, 19-20 October 2009 Theresa Swinehart Vice-President
More informationTHE MASTER LIST OF DNS TERMINOLOGY. First Edition
THE MASTER LIST OF DNS TERMINOLOGY First Edition DNS can be hard to understand and if you re unfamiliar with the terminology, learning more about DNS can seem as daunting as learning a new language. To
More informationInternet Technical Governance: Orange s view
Internet Technical Governance: Orange s view 1 Internet Technical Governance: Orange s view With the increasing use of IP technologies in the electronic communication networks and services, Internet Technical
More informationPurchasing Performance Audit MARSHALL UNIVERSITY. 101 Southpointe Drive, Suite E Edwardsville, IL 62025 v.618.692.9085 f.618.692.
Purchasing Performance Audit MARSHALL UNIVERSITY 101 Southpointe Drive, Suite E Edwardsville, IL 62025 v.618.692.9085 f.618.692.9086 Issue Date: January 4, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE
More informationThe Internet Ecosystem
The Internet Ecosystem 15 October 2010 Internet Society InternetSociety.org info@isoc.org Galerie Jean-Malbuisson, 15 CH-1204 Geneva Switzerland Tel: +41 22 807 1444 Fax: +41 22 807 1445 1775 Wiehle Ave.
More informationConsultation on Root Zone KSK Rollover
Consultation on Root Zone KSK Rollover 2012-12-14 Consultation Objective The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Functions contract (SA1301---12---CN---0035) between ICANN and the United States
More informationIEncrypt a work-in-progress
IEncrypt a work-in-progress open-source initiative to increase encryption of traffic to and from.ie web sites, starting with newly registered second-level.ie domains. Developed by Tolerant Networks Limited
More informationPolicy Overview and Definitions
Overview The following policies, which govern the top level domain (TLD or Registry) indicated on Schedule A, are based on policies and best practices drawn from ICANN, WIPO, and other relevant sources,
More informationPre Delegation Testing (PDT) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Pre Delegation Testing (PDT) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) [Ver 1.7 2013-06- 04] List of contents General questions Who do I contact with questions about Pre- Delegation Testing?... 3 What is the process
More informationDNS & IPv6. Agenda 4/14/2009. MENOG4, 8-9 April 2009. Raed Al-Fayez SaudiNIC CITC rfayez@citc.gov.sa, www.nic.net.sa. DNS & IPv6.
DNS & IPv6 MENOG4, 8-9 April 2009 Raed Al-Fayez SaudiNIC CITC rfayez@citc.gov.sa, www.nic.net.sa Agenda DNS & IPv6 Introduction What s next? SaudiNIC & IPv6 About SaudiNIC How a cctld Registry supports
More informationGlossary of Technical Terms Related to IPv6
AAAA Record An AAAA record stores a 128-bit Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) address, which does not fit the standard A record format. For example, 2007:0db6:85a3:0000:0000:6a2e:0371:7234 is a valid
More informationTHE MOST EFFICIENT DOmAIN management SERvICE IN THE WORLD
THE MOST EFFICIENT DOmAIN management SERvICE IN THE WORLD Realtime Register has been active in the web hosting and domain name industry for more than 10 years and has been IcaNN accredited since 2004.
More informationThe DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY BRIEF VOLUME 8 - ISSUE 3 - AUGUST 2011
The DOMAIN NAME INDUSTRY BRIEF VOLUME 8 - ISSUE 3 - AUGUST 2011 THE VERISIGN DOMAIN REPORT As the global registry operator for.com and.net, Verisign reviews the state of the domain name industry through
More informationDeploying DNSSEC: From End-Customer To Content
Deploying DNSSEC: From End-Customer To Content March 28, 2013 www.internetsociety.org Our Panel Moderator: Dan York, Senior Content Strategist, Internet Society Panelists: Sanjeev Gupta, Principal Technical
More informationFY15 Operating Plan and Budget
FY15 Operating Plan and Budget Introduction TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. FY15 Highlights 1.1. Revenues..5 1.2. Operating Expenses...7 1.3. Statement of Activities 9 1.4. Capital Expenditures.....10 1.5. Resource
More informationOpenSRS Domain Transfers Guide. October 23, 2008
OpenSRS Domain Transfers Guide October 23, 2008 Table of Contents Introduction...3 About this Document...3 Users and Roles...4 General Transfer Rules...4 Domain Transfers in the Test Environment (Horizon)...4
More informationThe registry has received complaints from registrants and registrars about the registry practice of deleting names pending verification.
Proposed Service Name of Proposed Service: RegistryPro request to modify handling of names pending verification Technical description of Proposed Service: RegistryPro proposes to modify the registry practice
More informationPolicy, Business, Technical and Operational Considerations for the Management of a country code Top Level Domain (cctld)
Policy, Business, Technical and Operational Considerations for the Management of a country code Top Level Domain (cctld) APRIL 2008 DRAFT For further information, please contact the ITU-D ICT Applications
More informationDNSSEC Policy Statement Version 1.1.0. 1. Introduction. 1.1. Overview. 1.2. Document Name and Identification. 1.3. Community and Applicability
DNSSEC Policy Statement Version 1.1.0 This DNSSEC Practice Statement (DPS) conforms to the template included in RFC 6841. 1. Introduction The approach described here is modelled closely on the corresponding
More informationDraft WGIG Issue Paper on the Multilingualization of
Draft WGIG Issue Paper on the Multilingualization of Internet Naming System This paper is a 'draft working paper' reflecting the preliminary findings of the drafting team. It has been subject to review
More informationOverview of DNSSEC deployment worldwide
The EURid Insights series aims to analyse specific aspects of the domainname environment. The reports are based on surveys, studies and research conducted by EURid in cooperation with industry experts
More informationPost-Send Vetting Techniques... 6 Methodology... 6
Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group (MAAWG) Vetting Best Common Practices (BCP) November 2011 Introduction... 1 Why Vet?... 2 Pre-Send Vetting Techniques... 2 Corporate Entity Formation and History... 2
More informationFY17 Operating Plan & Budget
FY17 Operating Plan & Budget Draft for Public Comment 5 March 2016 Table of Contents Table of Contents... 2 0 - Changes Following Initial Publication... 5 1 - Introduction... 6 2 - Planning & Budget Overview...
More informationCustomer Satisfaction Survey of Indian Tribal Governments. Office of Indian Tribal Governments Tax Exempt Government Entities Division
Customer Satisfaction Survey of Indian Tribal Governments Office of Indian Tribal Governments Tax Exempt Government Entities Division March 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2011 ITG CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY...
More informationDomain Name Registration Agreement
Domain Name Registration Agreement THIS AGREEMENT HAS A PROVISION FOR ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES. This Services Agreement ("Agreement") sets forth the terms and conditions of your use
More informationINTERNET ORGANIZATION OVERVIEW OF THE INTERNET'S ORGANIZATION AND MAIN STANDARD BODIES. Internet Organization. Peter R. Egli INDIGOO.COM. indigoo.
INTERNET ORGANIZATION OVERVIEW OF THE INTERNET'S ORGANIZATION AND MAIN STANDARD BODIES Peter R. Egli INDIGOO.COM 1/17 Contents 1. Internet Organizations 2. Why the Internet is called Inter-Net 3. Internet
More informationBaseline requirements Version 1.0 Errata
Baseline requirements Version 1.0 Errata 1. Auditor Qualification Requirements Effective 1 Jan 2013 A. In Section 3 (References), add: ETSI Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Trust Service
More informationDistributed Systems. 09. Naming. Paul Krzyzanowski. Rutgers University. Fall 2015
Distributed Systems 09. Naming Paul Krzyzanowski Rutgers University Fall 2015 October 7, 2015 2014-2015 Paul Krzyzanowski 1 Naming things Naming: map names to objects Helps with using, sharing, and communicating
More informationmydnsipv6 Success Story
Internet Identity For All mydnsipv6 Success Story By Norsuzana Harun Manager, Technology and Innovation Dept. 20 th July 2009 Agenda 1. About mydnsipv6 mydnsipv6 Roadmap (2006 2010) 2. mydnsipv6 Test Bed
More informationWhat's inside the cloud?!
What's inside the cloud?! Initial Arpanet Initial Arpanet Interface Message Processors - DDP-516 mini-computers - 24 Kbyte of Core memory - Store-and-forward packet switching - Predecessors of present
More informationGuide to Name Collision Identification and Mitigation for IT Professionals. 1 August 2014 Version 1.1
Guide to Name Collision Identification and Mitigation for IT Professionals 1 August 2014 Version 1.1 Table of Contents 1. Introduction... 4 1.1 Name Collisions... 4 1.2 Name Collisions Due to Private TLDs...
More informationDistributed Systems. 22. Naming. 2013 Paul Krzyzanowski. Rutgers University. Fall 2013
Distributed Systems 22. Naming Paul Krzyzanowski Rutgers University Fall 2013 November 21, 2013 2013 Paul Krzyzanowski 1 My 15 MacBook Pro The rightmost computer on my desk Paul s aluminum laptop, but
More informationTopics of Interest Iraklion, Greece June 2008
Topics of Interest Iraklion, Greece June 2008 Kim Davies Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers Agenda ICANN Budget for 2009 Interim Trust Anchor Repository
More informationPart I - Gathering WHOIS Information
Part I - Gathering WHOIS Information Exercise 1: command-line WHOIS queries: in the following exercise you will use a Linux system to perform WHOIS lookups from a command-line. This requires outbound TCP
More informationsigning the root saga
signing the root saga.se DNSSEC and IPV6 Workshop October 20, 2008, Stockholm richard.lamb@icann.org DNSSEC is a PKI SSL for DNS without encryption Recent Events Calls from the community to sign the root:
More informationThe Proposal for Internationalizing cctld Names
The Proposal for Internationalizing cctld Names By Chinese Domain Name Consortium (CDNC) June 2005 Introduction The Internet from its birth was in English. In its early years in the United States of America,
More informationComputer Networks: Domain Name System
Computer Networks: Domain Name System Domain Name System The domain name system (DNS) is an application-layer protocol for mapping domain names to IP addresses DNS www.example.com 208.77.188.166 http://www.example.com
More informationXN--P1AI (РФ) DNSSEC Policy and Practice Statement
XN--P1AI (РФ) DNSSEC Policy and Practice Statement XN--P1AI (РФ) DNSSEC Policy and Practice Statement... 1 INTRODUCTION... 2 Overview... 2 Document name and identification... 2 Community and Applicability...
More information